The following comes from a February 27 column in First Things by Michael New, assistant professor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn.
Much of the mainstream media coverage of Roe v. Wade’s recent forty-year anniversary indicated that grassroots abortion rights activists are pessimistic about the future. However, in the days before the March for Life many pro-choice commentators expressed optimism. They claimed that recent polling data indicates that public opinion is shifting in a direction more sympathetic to legal abortion. For example, a recent Think Progress article cites a Fox News exit poll indicating that 59 percent of Americans think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Similarly, a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll covered in the Washington Post and elsewhere suggested that 70 percent of Americans oppose overturning Roe v. Wade.
These hopeful takes from supporters of abortion all commit the cardinal sin of abortion politics: reading too much into the results of isolated surveys. To seriously analyze fluctuations in public opinion on abortion, one needs to consider responses to the same question, preferably asked by the same survey research firm, over a period of time. Indeed, surveys have always shown high public support for Roe v. Wade.
As Dave Andrusko points out in NRL News Today, there are several reasons for this. First, not all Americans realize that Roe v. Wade dealt with abortion. Some people think the decision involved school desegregation or some other issue. Furthermore, many Americans think Roe v. Wade only legalized first trimester abortions. Others think that overturning Roe would ban abortion everywhere, instead of returning the issue to the states.
A poll released by Rasmussen after the election showed that “pro-choice” sentiment has increased to 54 percent, while only 38 percent of respondents described themselves as “pro-life.” This caused some concern among pro-life activists. However, a closer look at Rasmussen’s polling indicates Rasmussen polls have always shown higher pro-choice sentiment than Gallup polls. This might be because Rasmussen surveys likely voters, while Gallup surveys the population as a whole.
More importantly, the results of Rasmussen’s November poll showed very little change in abortion attitudes from a poll the firm took back in April. Rasmussen’s April survey also showed that likely voters were more likely to describe themselves as “pro-choice” than “pro-life,” by a 51–40 margin. In short, the “war on women” rhetoric and the inopportune statements by U.S. Senate candidates Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock only resulted in a three-percentage-point gain in “pro-choice” sentiment—a difference that falls within the poll’s margin of error.
More evidence of stable abortion attitudes comes from a recent Marist Poll that was commissioned by the Knights of Columbus. It found that 43 percent of Americans currently identify themselves as pro-life. This is very similar to the 40 percent that identified as pro-life in January 2012 and the 45 percent that identified as pro-life in June 2010. Similarly, the poll indicates that 56 percent of Americans currently feel that abortion should either always be illegal or legal only in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the other. Five separate Marist surveys taken since October 2008 consistently show that at least 51 percent of Americans hold this position. Again, there is little evidence that Americans are becoming more sympathetic toward legal abortion.
The Knights of Columbus should be commended for commissioning this Marist survey. The mainstream media enjoys reporting on polls that purportedly show strong public sentiment in favor of legal abortion. However, by asking people what they thought about abortion in specific circumstances, Marist is able to present a more nuanced and a more accurate view of public attitudes toward abortion. Furthermore, pro-life groups should more frequently commission surveys on attitudes toward incremental pro-life laws. This would demonstrate that many short-term legislative objectives of the pro-life movement enjoy broad public support….
To read the entire column, click here.
“…there are several reasons for this. First, not all Americans realize that Roe v. Wade dealt with abortion. Some people think the decision involved school desegregation or some other issue.”
Students (who obviously grow into adults) are woefully ignorant and unschooled. They are ignorant of the laws, how government works and is supposed to work, and their voter responsibility.
They are ignorant of their rights – under Federal and State Constitutions.
They vote for people who oppose their own beliefs based upon TV soundbites that sound good, or candidates who promise them free stuff.
Please go to “Endowment for Human Development” on the internet.
Mark this site as a favorite, and pass it on to others.
The scientific information that proves these babies feel pain starting at 8 weeks and 3 days – should stop abortion at least at this stage and later.
Education is the key to a better and moral life.
Polls should be taken to find out how people think of the aborted child.
Is that aborted child a baby human being?
Would you interfere if you saw a child being beaten to death in your neighbor’s yard??
Would you you try to save a child’s life if it was drowning in a neighbor’s pool???
Is that aborted child the property of the mother??
What rights does that aborted child have if it has any???
ETC.,Etc.,etc.
Larry, thank you. You are so right! This is in line with the hope for a national museum of the murdered child.
Rasmussen only uses landlines to access people, and uses “touchtone” prompts to get the answers to questions, not live operators; also, they don’t call cell phones, which are now the majority of voice communication access lines. So Rasmussen’s numbers can point out a trend, but are never as good as Gallup’s numbers, who uses human beings and reaches to all phones, including cells.
Wtih abortion, it’s how you ask the question. Abortion activists always want to add everyone that supports an abortion for ANY reason, which includes rape, incest and to protect the physical life of the mother (which most Catholics support). But if you divide the population among thoses who support it without reserviation, support it only under the small set of circumstances, or don’t support it at all, then the clustering of the issue responses diverges considerably from what the abortion folks purport. Support for some controls to the avaiablity of abortion, while keeping it legal, usually attains majority support… but this is a reality that the abortion folks don’t want to publicize. They’d rather lump everybody together and say support is off the charts.
It has become increasingly apparent since the arrival of Obama on the national scene that a tremendous movement by Axelrod, Plouffe and the rest of the Demonratic Chicago thugocracy towards COOKING THE POLLS has arrived. It has become very pronounced, moreover, especially since around September of ’12, when there was palpable panic that Obama was VERY vulnerable as to re-election because of the Benghazi debacle, and 4 Americans murdered by the Islamonazi mob, and Obama being caught doing virtually NOTHING to stop it. In fact, Axelrod threatened Gallup pollsters at the time that they risked White House legal intervention if they didn’t change their polling “methodology” to reflect Axelrod’s own demographic “realities,” hence the W.H. pressure on Gallup. Very strange poll results started to manifest themselves shortly after, with Obama doing so much “better” as the polling became more ‘cooked.’
In many sites I read, such as ‘Townhall. com,’ as to the elections themselves that just passed in November of ’12, Rachel Alexander averred that there were MANY strange anomalies in voting bolstered by the “cooked” polls that occurred natonwide with many people such as the Teaparty bunch saying there was downright FRAUD taking place. Is anyone who really knows about Obama and his amoral confreres really surprised? For me, I believe he stole the election and probably stole the ’08 election as well. But with so much corruption and laziness abounding within the ranks of those who should be protecting the electorate, who’s gonna present the evidence to really prove it? We’re in a genuine pickel, people, and Obama, once again, needs impeaching. GOD BLESS US ALL, MARKRITE